Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Criminal law (2)
- Alcoholism (1)
- Autonomy (1)
- Behavior modification (1)
- Causal theory of excuse (1)
-
- Compulsion (1)
- Conscious will (1)
- Culpability (1)
- Determinism (1)
- Duress (1)
- Eighth Amendment (1)
- Free will (1)
- Genetics (1)
- Innocent until proven guilty (1)
- Intoxication (1)
- Joseph Millumethics (1)
- Medical coercion (1)
- Medical ethics (1)
- Medical manipulation of children’s choices (1)
- Mens rea (1)
- Mental states (1)
- Mitigation (1)
- Moral agency (1)
- Neuroscience (1)
- Parental control (1)
- Powell v. Texas (1)
- Prediction and prevention of dangerous behavior (1)
- Prefrontal cortex (1)
- Punishment (1)
- Rationality (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences
Shots For Tots?, Eric A. Feldman
Shots For Tots?, Eric A. Feldman
All Faculty Scholarship
By endorsing the use of a vaccine that makes the experience of puffing on a cigarette deeply distasteful, Lieber and Millum have taken the first few tentative steps into a future filled with medical interventions that manipulate individual preferences. It is tempting to embrace the careful arguments of “Preventing Sin” and celebrate the possibility that the profound individual and social costs of smoking will finally be tamed. Yet there is something unsettling about the possibility that parental discretion may be on the cusp of a radical expansion, one that involves a new and unexplored approach to behavior modification.
Neuroscience And The Future Of Personhood And Responsibility, Stephen J. Morse
Neuroscience And The Future Of Personhood And Responsibility, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This is a chapter in a book, Constitution 3.0: Freedom and Technological Change, edited by Jeffrey Rosen and Benjamin Wittes and published by Brookings. It considers whether likely advances in neuroscience will fundamentally alter our conceptions of human agency, of what it means to be a person, and of responsibility for action. I argue that neuroscience poses no such radical threat now and in the immediate future and it is unlikely ever to pose such a threat unless it or other sciences decisively resolve the mind-body problem. I suggest that until that happens, neuroscience might contribute to the reform of …
A Good Enough Reason: Addiction, Agency And Criminal Responsibility, Stephen J. Morse
A Good Enough Reason: Addiction, Agency And Criminal Responsibility, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
The article begins by contrasting medical and moral views of addiction and how such views influence responsibility and policy analysis. It suggests that since addiction always involves action and action can always be morally evaluated, we must independently decide whether addicts do not meet responsibility criteria rather than begging the question and deciding by the label of ‘disease’ or ‘moral weakness’. It then turns to the criteria for criminal responsibility and shows that the criteria for criminal responsibility, like the criteria for addiction, are all folk psychological. Therefore, any scientific information about addiction must be ‘translated’ into the law’s folk …